$$$$$$Originally Posted by steelblood
They had to make sure it wouldn't impact the Pats* first before adding it.
$$$$$$
They had to make sure it wouldn't impact the Pats* first before adding it.
Cleveland spelled backwards is DNA Level C
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/d...itty29/mjg.jpg
another AA/AS original.
Under the same criteria, when the Steelers let Max Starks walk after this coming season, they should be looking at a 3rd Round comp in the 2011 Draft.
Never mind that Starks couldn't carry Faneca's jock strap and will never sniff a Pro Bowl. But Starks will have 6 years in and will have been paid over $15 over his last two seasons on the Steelers.
If the comp rules for losing FAs are this arbitrary, you pretty much have to over pay a player to guarantee any return of value for him. Lose a player who's been with your team for a while and you can forget about getting equal value, even if he is an annual Pro Bowler.
The upside is that if the Steelers can't get Jimmy Hate's deal done, we should be well compensated judging from his length of service.
Steelers...On The STAIRWAY TO SEVEN!!!
http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/1...etsteelfk7.jpg
ASIAN... thanks, brotha!
The amount we have paid Starks over the past 2 season would not enter into the compensatory pick discussion if he signs elsewhere next year. It is how much the team that signs him away from us pays him that determines what level of comp pick a team gets.
Under the same criteria, when the Steelers let Max Starks walk after this coming season, they should be looking at a 3rd Round comp in the 2011 Draft.
Never mind that Starks couldn't carry Faneca's jock strap and will never sniff a Pro Bowl. But Starks will have 6 years in and will have been paid over $15 over his last two seasons on the Steelers.
If the comp rules for losing FAs are this arbitrary, you pretty much have to over pay a player to guarantee any return of value for him. Lose a player who's been with your team for a while and you can forget about getting equal value, even if he is an annual Pro Bowler.
The upside is that if the Steelers can't get Jimmy Hate's deal done, we should be well compensated judging from his length of service.
Steeler teams featuring stat-driven, me-first, fantasy-football-darling diva types such as Antonio Brown & Le'Veon Bell won no championships.
Super Bowl winning Steeler teams were built around a dynamic, in-your-face defense plus blue-collar, hard-hitting, no-nonsense football players on offense such as Hines Ward & Jerome Bettis.
We don't want Juju & Conner to replace what we lost in Brown & Bell.
We are counting on Juju & Conner to return us to the glory we once had with Hines & The Bus.
that is so stupid. the fact that faneca was a pro bowler every season should matter more than having 10 seasons under his belt. no logic at all. its stupid faneca will bring a lower pick than max starks would get
I am just trying to understand the league's reasoning behind this stipulation. Why penalize a team that lets a long-term vet walk? Is this something they are trying to discourage, and why? It makes no sense whatsoever.
Let me start off by saying I think the entire compensatory pick process is crap.
That being said, if I had to offer up a reason (guess) behind the 10 year rule I would say it's because most times when you sign an aging veteran your going to cut them before their contract ends. In Faneca's case he signed a 5 year $40 Mil contract ($8 Mil per). The $8 Mil should get a 3rd round comp according the forumla. But in most cases those contracts are back heavy and the big cap hit number will come in years 4 and 5, where most likely the team will just cut the player anyway. So the real value of the contract is less.
Although looking at Faneca's cap hit numbers it looks pretty even with only a $1 Mil difference in the final couple of years. Whoever Fanca's agent is, that person did a good job.
I don't like it, but that's the only reasoning I could see behind it...
I think the reason for the rule is to interact with the reason they have compensation picks in the first place.
I think they feel that if you got 10 years of service out of a guy, then you've gotten your reward. I think the design of these bonus picks is to reward teams that lose a guy after 1-2 contracts.
And if you go get an 8 years veteran and he leaves 3 years later, you shouldn't really get compensated for that. Its mostly just to protect teams that get screwed by a guy just when he starts performing well and leaves.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks